The Catholic primate, Archbishop Seán Brady, warned yesterday of damage to traditional marriage if institutional recognition was conferred on other, "de facto", unions. Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent, reports.
He described these as "forms of cohabitation of a sexual kind, which are not marriage".
Last week, in a document on the rights and duties of cohabiting couples, the Law Reform Commission made eight recommendations aimed at improving rights to inheritance, social welfare and healthcare. It proposed these measures should also apply to same-sex couples, but stopped short of recommending the establishment of State recognition of cohabiting status.
"Some recent initiatives propose the institutional recognition of 'de facto' unions and even their equivalence to families which have their origin in a marriage commitment. It is important to draw attention to the damage that such recognition and equivalence would represent for the identity of marriage as traditionally understood," Archbishop Brady said.
He was speaking at a seminar in Dublin yesterday on "Supporting Marriage and Family Life". It was organised by the Communications Office of the Irish Bishops' Conference. Among other bishops in attendance were: Dr Christopher Jones, Bishop of Elphin; Dr Michael Neary, Archbishop of Tuam; Dr Bill Murphy, Bishop of Kerry; and Dr Colm O'Reilly, Bishop of Ardagh and Clonmacnois.
"We are, in this debate, in a very real sense walking on holy ground," Archbishop Brady said. "Not only are marriage and family grounded in the will of God and revealed by the order of nature, they are also the primary source of stability, life and love in any society."
The Catholic Church had "a duty and a right to teach and act in defence of the primacy of the natural institutions of marriage and the family", the primate continued, and "should not apologise for insisting that other forms of relationships are not of the same nature and status as that of marriage and the family".
On same-sex unions the church taught that homosexual people were to be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. It condemned all forms of violence, harassment or abuse directed against people who were homosexual, Dr Brady said.
Recent changes in legislation had removed injustices against people because of their sexuality, "without of themselves creating any parallel legal institution to marriage", he said. But when considering future legislation on marriage and the family, it was essential "to acknowledge the vital distinction between private homosexual behaviour between consenting adults and formalising that behaviour" as an institution in a legal structure, he said.
Such recognition of same-sex unions would suggest they had "an equally valid context for the bringing up of children. Sacred scripture and the natural order clearly point out that this is not the case," he said. What was at stake was "the natural right of children to the presence normally of a mother and father in their lives". Given legal changes already made, the argument that same-sex marriage was necessary to protect human rights had become a redundant one, he said.
He said that "when the family begins to disintegrate through unbearable social pressures, or when its privileged status is diminished, then a move towards unacceptable individualism is inevitable, with increased fragmentation and loss of social cohesion."